The generative indeterminacy of (a) living diversity is orders of magnitude more sophisticated than the variously atavistic legal frameworks with which we might frame them.
Discontinuities between law and activism are, in this context, the result of a false dichotomy. That is – the differences and environmentally unsustainable if not outright and questionably unethical outcomes of misdirective law tend to be the consequences of a legal system that is biased towards self-validating continuity over the delivery of truth or justice.
Life is not law’s servant but has perhaps necessarily been cast this way. The continuity of regulatory systems profoundly depends on the invocation of a generally unacknowledged downstream turbulence. This provides the kinds of stultifying inertia that revivifies and self-validates legal systems (and their career-oriented inhabitants) without significantly or positively effecting the social and cultural complexity that they seek to address.
The contradictions between property and nature do not err in nature’s benefit. They should. The question becomes one of the life of the law and the paradoxical peculiarity of any system of prescriptive regulatory encoding that fails to understand its own complexity.
Daedelus Kite 